Mercedes F1 Team fired up the heart of its 2017 car last Wednesday which confirms the team which has dominated the pinnacle of the motorsport for the last three years is on schedule with the assembly of its new machinery.

Just_a_fan wrote:The chap with the little bag of spare washers - that must Lewis's car then with the bits left out to help Bottas.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Getting our excuses prepared already. Very good.

Sorry, couldn't resist..

Please, this is not the Ying Yang thread.

SR71 wrote:
Are we expecting a 3rd year in a row with the ultra thin nose?

Is it a crash test issue that precludes teams from copying?

I think we can believe in the words of many designers, that the shape of the nose is not a game changer but rather the area. Might be even the other way round if the others can get a lower area or less turbulent flow with the penis nose.

I believe these are the words of the designers who have failed to beat Mercedes.

Sounds like a reputable source.

Perhaps they have no clue the power of Merc's nose and thus have no understanding?

SR71 wrote:
Are we expecting a 3rd year in a row with the ultra thin nose?

Is it a crash test issue that precludes teams from copying?

I think we can believe in the words of many designers, that the shape of the nose is not a game changer but rather the area. Might be even the other way round if the others can get a lower area or less turbulent flow with the penis nose.

I believe these are the words of the designers who have failed to beat Mercedes.

Sounds like a reputable source.

No, also the words of Paddy. Or basically every engineer once the ugly (penis) noses started...everybody was saying that the shape is not really relevant, it is just relevant to get it as small as possible.

Eddie_Temple wrote:Perhaps they have no clue the power of Merc's nose and thus have no understanding?

Why should that be the case? They have vast amounts of data on the nose without the penis. They know very well how the dick influences the airflow under the nose and can easily simulate a nose with a bigger frame like the Merc nose.

I even think it is the other way round. The Merc nose is giving a smaller area for the air than the penis nose with its higher cutouts. Merc can compensate/afford this and does not want an ugly nose. Everybody else can not afford this.

I think we can believe in the words of many designers, that the shape of the nose is not a game changer but rather the area. Might be even the other way round if the others can get a lower area or less turbulent flow with the penis nose.

I believe these are the words of the designers who have failed to beat Mercedes.

Sounds like a reputable source.

No, also the words of Paddy. Or basically every engineer once the ugly (penis) noses started...everybody was saying that the shape is not really relevant, it is just relevant to get it as small as possible.

Eddie_Temple wrote:Perhaps they have no clue the power of Merc's nose and thus have no understanding?

Why should that be the case? They have vast amounts of data on the nose without the penis. They know very well how the dick influences the airflow under the nose and can easily simulate a nose with a bigger frame like the Merc nose.

I even think it is the other way round. The Merc nose is giving a smaller area for the air than the penis nose with its higher cutouts. Merc can compensate/afford this and does not want an ugly nose. Everybody else can not afford this.

Yeah because Paddy would give away his secrets right?

And Merc doing something for styling purposes? Just wow SMH.

I guess you missed the point completely. Mercs nose is so dramatically different that it's safe to assume their aero in this area is misunderstood by other teams and designers.

SR71 wrote:
I guess you missed the point completely. Mercs nose is so dramatically different that it's safe to assume their aero in this area is misunderstood by other teams and designers.

More likely is that Merc's aero further back is not the same as everyone else's. You might stick a Merc nose on a STR and not get any benefit because you don't also replicate the bat wing and the t-tray design and the sidepod leading edges etc.

If someone wants to copy the Merc nose then they need also to change the design downstream. That's a lot of work for something that may or may not give a decent performance boost. Get one bit of the change wrong and you get different results.

We need to remember that these cars are not just a bundle of cut-and-paste details. They're nose-to-tail designs and you make random changes at your peril.

Turbo says "Dumpster sounds so much more classy. It's the diamond of the cesspools."

Don't forget it was Bob Bell, then TD of Mercedes, who alerted all of the teams of the upcoming penis nose problem. This led to the penis nose being known as "Bob's Knob" in some circles.

I can see Mercedes doing one thing purely for aesthetic reasons... spend more money to develop a more visually pleasing car without sacrificing performance.

Considering that Daimler's F1 program is largely a marketing and development endeavor, if all it took was more cash for Mercedes to eat their cake and have it too (equal or better performance without penis noses all over their billboards) its reasonable to figure they'd do that.

TLDR: It's reasonable to expect Mercedes spent the money to develop a non-penis nose with equal to superior performance.

Eddie_Temple wrote:Perhaps they have no clue the power of Merc's nose and thus have no understanding?

It's the Mercedes nose that was "wrong," not the other way around. That's why the team widened it prior to the first race last season...

A wide, flat nose creates more downforce locally, and it doesn't necessarily have to result in compromised performance elsewhere. But, without the sort of downstream changes to which others have alluded, it won't work--I think that's because of the tendency for air to flow over a wide, flat nose instead of around it, which is what needs to happen for several reasons.

Since Mercedes clearly had no need to fundamentally alter a base design that's proven to be pretty decent over the last few years, the team correctly judged no need to accommodate a nose that's more in line with current thinking.

A wide, flat nose creates more downforce locally, and it doesn't necessarily have to result in compromised performance elsewhere. But, without the sort of downstream changes to which others have alluded, it won't work--I think that's because of the tendency for air to flow over a wide, flat nose instead of around it, which is what needs to happen for several reasons.

Since Mercedes clearly had no need to fundamentally alter a base design that's proven to be pretty decent over the last few years, the team correctly judged no need to accommodate a nose that's more in line with current thinking.

Or so goes my line of thinking.

BTW, I don't think they widened it, as such as they made the struts holding the wing closer together, making the nose seem wider.

It may have been to reduce interference drag from adjacent surfaces. Wherein you try to join adjacent surfaces at 90°, or as close to it as possible, in order to reduce the area of intersection and/or avoid close-proximity surfaces which create constricted flow paths. Notice the difference in the size of the pylon root between those two photos.

I mean to suggest the opposite, actually. In the upper photo, the junctions are thicker. When the pylons are flush with the sides of the nose they are intersecting at a tangent rather than perpendicularly. Given a similar pylon cross-section, a perpendicular joint offers a less voluminous union than one approaching at an angle, or tangent.